I've done the M9/M/MM comparo with the D800e. They all look different.

The M9 versus D800e: The Nikon has more depth to the file, almost like negative film. More resolution than I need. Weighs nothing but is bulky. No complaints with resolution. Took me a while to find a workflow I like for color. Brilliant B&W camera. Really chaulky blacks and grays. A maliable file. The raws are "thick", like a negative with lots of density.

The M9 has a more fragile file, meaning less headroom, limited shadow recovery. Beautiful color from LR4 and C1-7. It is so small and light, I can fit an entire kit in jacket pockets (35 summicron, 28 elmarit, two batteries, charger, and a body). Resolution is much better than one would expect from 18mpx, and in fact enlarges rather well. The raws aren't TOO sharp but the acuity is there.

New M: See comments for the D800. Very similar file. Color is different than the 800e.

MM: better than the D800 for B&W, maybe. Really an amazing file. You can mimic almost any emulsion with the MM in post. I am shocked at how close (or identical, almost) to TMax it can get.

S2: I've handled one a few times, looked at lots of files. The files are, to my eye, very similar to D800 files, but have a different look to them. Lenses are better. handles better than a D800. GREAT viewfinder.

I'm sure you will try them all out to find what works for you, in terms of weight. I think they all make quality images.

The large viewfinder of the S/S2 and H4D are important points,these viewfinders are huge compared to canon or nikon and a pleasure to use..

More important in my view. The OP wants to replace MF DSLR with a smaller option, my guess is that he is willing to live with say 24x36 but APS-c or 4/3 is nothing he would regard. He also expressively ruled out technical cameras. I would suggest that it is important that he choses the compromises he makes based on realities and not marketing figures.

Regarding the color issue, I would say it is problematic. For one, anyone using a camera/raw converter is familiarised with the color rendition of that combo. Switching to another combo will be an effort. It may be that there are rendition differences that are hard to overcome, the best way to find out is probably to rent equipment and test.

It is my understanding that the OP is very satisfied with his present equipment, except for the weight. He also shoots the way that MFD has best advantage, that sets the ribbon at some height.

Numbers and electronics terms aside the poster is saying he has found an advantage in the color and tonal rendering; the specific technological underpinnings of this are relatively unimportant (except to engineers looking to improve them).

Just said to my wife/AKA "Serpa of High Priced Camera Gear" that I must get out and test the concept of my carrying the H4D with the 80 and she carrying the 28, HTS and Tripod.

I'm hoping to get a few more walks in with this configuration but this weekends test will tell.

Again, a big Thank You for the kindness and time you spent to share.

Jack

Hi Jack

I think keeping your Hasselblad is a good move.What you use to transport it and support it can make a big difference.

A few things that can help.

This tripod is really nice as far as transporting it goes.

The way it folds down to a nice flat shape and the fact that it's very lightmakes it nice to transport and it sits comfortably on the side of the body.Used with the right ball head it makes for a good travel tripod.It's not rock solid rigid, but using the mirror up function of the Hasselblad it's just fine.

For the cameras if you get "just the right size" fanny packs that you can wear on the hipsI think you will feel the weight of the Hasselblad much less. One fanny pack for the camera and one for the other lens and HTS.

I have one of these that I use with the d800 and 70-200. You'll need a smaller one.

They sit nicely on the small of the back and actually offer some support.

This one has a nice double strap that makes the pack sit nice and flatand allows me to turn it around to the front for access.

They make loads of different sizes of these. I think that with the right hip packs you willbe moving around better. Just keeping hands free to move as you walk and centering any carried load should help you significantly.

I also think that getting a high IQ compact such as the Sigma Merrill for those days when you don't feel up to carrying the Hasselblad,rather than "losing the Hasselblad.I also think that keeping the challenge of getting around with the Hasselblad will encourage you to "keep on trucking".

I'm not trying to go off topic here, because I think this has some relevance.

Lately I've been looking at 4/3's cameras for video secondary cams and to fit in small areas. Doing this I also looked at their still still quality and it's pretty good. Not 80mpx mfd, or 30mpx 35mm but still very good for such a small sensor.

The one thing that strikes me is where cameras are going. If you ever tried the Panasonic touch screen focus on the gh3 I think you'd be amazed, I know I was. Even in low light it locked and tracked as well as my35mm cameras.

I did a video test touch screen racking from subject to subject and in video mode it looks like professional focus pull. Really surprising;

This along with dedicated wi-fi to computers or ipads, with our without an adhoc network, smaller sharper lenses, faster frame rates and it's possible camera tech is not leveled out, it's just beginning.

I know if the Olympus or Pansonic mft's cameras had just a little more detail, they would probably be perfect for the op.

Also in stills they shoot a native 4:3 format just like his Hasselblad.

I absolutely agree with James. My take is that DSLR-s with big lenses are still heavy. The only small full frame 135 option is really the Leica, but I guess the smaller formats can be attractive. But, there is a but, a larger sensor gives better image quality all other factors being similar.

I'm not trying to go off topic here, because I think this has some relevance.

Lately I've been looking at 4/3's cameras for video secondary cams and to fit in small areas. Doing this I also looked at their still still quality and it's pretty good. Not 80mpx mfd, or 30mpx 35mm but still very good for such a small sensor.

The one thing that strikes me is where cameras are going. If you ever tried the Panasonic touch screen focus on the gh3 I think you'd be amazed, I know I was. Even in low light it locked and tracked as well as my35mm cameras.

I did a video test touch screen racking from subject to subject and in video mode it looks like professional focus pull. Really surprising;

This along with dedicated wi-fi to computers or ipads, with our without an adhoc network, smaller sharper lenses, faster frame rates and it's possible camera tech is not leveled out, it's just beginning.

I know if the Olympus or Pansonic mft's cameras had just a little more detail, they would probably be perfect for the op.

Also in stills they shoot a native 4:3 format just like his Hasselblad.

Very nice Erick. Thanks for going to the trouble to make this test.Perfect illustration of what I have been getting at before.Sensors, both MF and the best 35mm dslr, have reached very high quality levelsand it's more about color profiling and processing if you are using these sensors.Then there is the whole area of color grading (term taken from motion picture) and color or B+Wstylizing.

Erick... I opened the pdf and the C1 image is small compared to the others... just thought I'd let you know.

It's also interesting to see how richer the passport checker and DNG profile editor are compared to the C1.

I think it's safe to say that great sensor quality determines technically high IQ, but the look is by far more determined by the profiles and custom look profiles. After that color grading/styling and effects being even more important for much of the more artsy world.

Very nice Erick. Thanks for going to the trouble to make this test.Perfect illustration of what I have been getting at before.Sensors, both MF and the best 35mm dslr, have reached very high quality levelsand it's more about color profiling and processing if you are using these sensors.Then there is the whole area of color grading (term taken from motion picture) and color or B+Wstylizing.

Erick... I opened the pdf and the C1 image is small compared to the others... just thought I'd let you know.

It's also interesting to see how richer the passport checker and DNG profile editor are compared to the C1.

We can discuss dynamic range or shadows till the end of time, but the limiting factor here is that there is no 20mm lens to be put in front of the D800 which will give the same level of IQ across the frame than the HCD 28mm on the H4D. And the best 20mm for the D800 weight a ton, so the objective of saving on weight would not be met.

Lets look at the weight difference first:

Hasselblad H4D-50 plus 28mm2,650g

Nikon D800E and Carl Zeiss 21mm1,600g

That puts the Hasselblad at 65% heavier.

I think it is safe to say that if someone has muscular problems it's a very significant gain for handling.

You are on the same page I am - weight as a trade off to image quality.At this point, the D800E is my main focus - Looks like it's array is quite adequate.Key will be mating that to the best quality lens that is not raising the weight combination to the level of the Hassie.

You are on the same page I am - weight as a trade off to image quality.At this point, the D800E is my main focus - Looks like it's array is quite adequate.Key will be mating that to the best quality lens that is not raising the weight combination to the level of the Hassie.

Jack,I own a D800E and a Zeiss 15mm and have had a Zeiss 21mm,I also have the 24mm 1.4G,35mm 1.4G,84mm 1.4G and it's a damn good camera,But of you are used to a h4D-50 with a HCD 28mm then you will be stepping down in IQ... the main benefit to you will be weight loss... Try a D800e out first before you commit to it..

I figured this would help,I shot these just half an hour ago,the intention to give an idea of the different quality of each system.. the focus may not be perfect but it looks ok to my eyes (FWIW),the light was falling fast so exposures vary a little..

ACR Zeiss profile applied with no distortion or vignetting correction.

I think it should be reassuring to that with the strong gains in IQ is 35mm DSLRs that moving to a significantly lighter camera with not have a significant impact on image qualitywith the exception of very large enlargements made with a tech camera setup.

MF DSLR to 35mm DSLR today is not that big of a difference.

Best thing is that the much lower prices of 35mm DSLR may mean that Jack can keep boththe Hasselblad and add the Nikon as a second option.

The best way to look at these file's is download the raws from the link and view them in a raw converter,the Blad and nikon file's can be compared in Phocus,when the Blad file is sharpened it is very detailed.. imho more than the nef. I used the protein powder bag as a focus reference ..

The best way to look at these file's is download the raws from the link and view them in a raw converter,the Blad and nikon file's can be compared in Phocus,when the Blad file is sharpened it is very detailed.. imho more than the nef. I used the protein powder bag as a focus reference ..

What lenses do you compare and which raw processor? Is it full aperture or best aperture? I see a lot of chroma in the Nikon shot. Axial chroma is hard, but lateral chroma should be handled in raw processing.